OFAC Launches Online Reconsideration Portal for Seeking Removal from Sanctions Lists

The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) recently introduced its new Reconsideration Portal, a digital platform for requesting removal from the agency’s sanctions lists. The portal is designed to streamline the delisting process by guiding petitioners (and/or their counsel) to submit all necessary information at the onset, reducing the follow-up requests that have historically delayed OFAC’s adjudication and encouraging more complete submissions from the start.

The portal also allows designated persons to request from OFAC certain unclassified and nonprivileged information underlying their sanctions determination (referred to as a “courtesy document”), potentially providing additional insight into the basis for a designation. OFAC indicated that it intends to transition away from allowing email submissions and is now strongly encouraging use of the portal.

While the Reconsideration Portal modernizes the submission and administration of reconsideration requests, petitioners must continue to satisfy the same substantive legal standards and evidentiary burden governing OFAC’s reconsideration process.

WHAT IS A DELISTING PETITION?

A delisting petition is the administrative mechanism through which an individual, entity, or property (e.g., a vessel) may seek removal from the List of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN List) or another OFAC sanctions list. The process of reconsideration is consistent with the objectives of US sanctions, which are generally intended not simply to punish but to encourage changes in behavior. As such, delisting is an integral part of an effective sanctions program.

Governed by 31 CFR § 501.807, the reconsideration process allows a sanctioned person or authorized counsel to request that OFAC reconsider a designation through the submission of legal arguments, factual submissions, and supporting evidence demonstrating that the designation should no longer apply.

The burden rests on the petitioner to establish that the designation was based on erroneous information, the circumstances have materially changed, or the removal would otherwise be consistent with the objectives of the applicable sanctions program. If OFAC grants the petition, the petitioner is removed from the applicable sanctions list and the associated sanctions are lifted. If the petition is denied, OFAC issues a written determination explaining the basis for its decision.

OFAC identifies two principal relevant arguments that may support a delisting petition:

• Change in Circumstances: When the circumstances underlying the designation no longer exist, for example, the petitioner demonstrates that it has ceased the conduct that gave rise to the designation, undergone changes in ownership or control, dissolved the sanctioned entity, or otherwise eliminated the basis for sanctions.
• Insufficient Basis: When the designation lacked a sufficient factual or legal basis when imposed, for example, when the sanction is based on mistaken identity or the individual resigned has from the relevant role.

Petitioners may also propose remedial measures that would further address the conduct underlying the designation or mitigate future sanctions concerns. However, OFAC makes clear that proposed remedial measures are not a substitute for demonstrating changed circumstances. Rather, they are generally most effective when presented alongside evidence showing that the conduct underlying the designation has ceased or is unlikely to recur.

NEW AND REVISED FAQS

In connection with the portal’s launch, OFAC updated its FAQ guidance:

• FAQ 897 (Revised): This FAQ continues to point petitioners to OFAC’s How to Request Removal from an OFAC Sanctions List webpage and the delisting procedures at 31 CFR § 501.807, but has been updated to reflect the new portal as the preferred filing channel.
• FAQ 1261 (New): In this FAQ, OFAC confirmed that a denied petitioner may reapply using the same process as the initial petition but must present new arguments or evidence to support a different outcome. Absent new arguments or evidence, OFAC may deny the petition by reference to its prior determination. It also clarifies that individuals who are mistakenly identified as sanctioned persons (e.g., due to a similar name) should not submit a request through the Reconsideration Portal and instead contact OFAC’s Compliance Hotline.

QUICK REFERENCE GUIDES

OFAC also published two new quick reference guides:

• Delisting Petitions Best Practices: This guide offers practical guidance on how to approach and structure a delisting petition. Among other things, it encourages petitioners to organize submissions logically, clearly identifying the legal basis for reconsideration, labeling supporting exhibits, providing English translations of non-English documents, and limiting submission materials to only those relevant to the petition. It recommends that petitioners contact OFAC if the Petition ID has not been issued within 10 business days of submitting the petition.
• What to Include in a Delisting Petition: This guide includes a checklist identifying the categories of information, arguments, and evidence OFAC expects petitioners to address for listed individuals, listed entities or property, and representatives of listed persons or property. The breadth of information OFAC may consider includes identifying information, sources of income, ownership and control information, management and operational details, and financial and transactional records. It also includes a section on the relevant arguments and evidence OFAC expects petitioners to address.

NAVIGATING THE RECONSIDERATION PORTAL

• Use the Reconsideration Portal for new petitions. OFAC has made clear that the portal is its preferred method for submitting and managing delisting requests, and petitioners should expect the agency to increasingly rely on the portal for future reconsideration submissions.
• Prepare supporting evidence before filing. The portal streamlines submission, but petitioners must still provide persuasive factual and legal support for reconsideration, treating the initial submission as the best opportunity to persuade OFAC. Accordingly, petitioners should carefully assess the available legal arguments and develop a comprehensive evidentiary record before filing.
• Recognize that the portal does not necessarily shorten OFAC’s substantive review. Although it may improve the efficiency of submitting and managing petitions, reconsideration requests may still require significant time where OFAC must coordinate with other agencies, evaluate classified or sensitive information, or consider broader foreign policy and national security interests.

While the Reconsideration Portal will help to modernize the mechanics of the submission process, successful delisting petitions continue to depend on developing a persuasive legal and factual record, anticipating OFAC’s concerns, and strategically presenting a well-supported case that aligns with the agency’s reconsideration standards and the objectives of the applicable sanctions program.

The strategy for a delisting petition will often depend on the nature of the underlying designation. For example, mistaken-identity cases may be comparatively straightforward where the petitioner can provide official identifying records demonstrating that they are not the designated person; vessel unblocking requests may present a clearer path to delisting where a blocked vessel has been sold to a reputable, nonsanctioned buyer and the petitioner can demonstrate a bona fide transfer of ownership and control.

By contrast, cases based on sensitive government information or intelligence data that cannot be disclosed may require a different approach, requiring petitioners to focus on changed circumstances, publicly available information, and affirmative evidence demonstrating that the basis for designation no longer exists.